The Bunter Sandstone in which Pleuromeia is the sole representative of plant-life, at least in certain localities, is usually considered to be a desert formation. We may not be far wrong in accepting Fitting’s suggestion that in this isolated species we have a relic of the sparse vegetation which was able to exist where the presence of lakes added a touch of life to the deadness of the Triassic desert.
Pleuromeia is recorded by Fliche as a rare fossil in the Middle Trias of France in the neighbourhood of Lunéville[166].
Herbaceous fossil species of Lycopodiales.
The history of our knowledge of fossil representatives of the Lycopodiales, as also of the Equisetales, affords a striking illustration of the danger of attempting to found a classification on such differences as are expressed by the terms herbaceous and arborescent in the sense in which they are usually employed. As we have seen[167], the presence of secondary wood in stems of the Palaeozoic plant now known as Calamites led so competent a botanist as Adolphe Brongniart to recognise a distinct generic type Calamodendron, which he placed in the Gymnosperms, reserving the designation Calamities for species in which no indication of secondary thickening had been found.
Similarly, the genus Sigillaria was regarded as a Gymnosperm because it was believed to be distinguished from Lepidodendron by the power of forming secondary vascular tissues; the latter genus, originally thought to be always herbaceous, was classed with the Pteridophytes. At the time when this unnatural separation was made between stems with secondary wood and those in which no secondary wood was known to exist, botanists were not aware of the occurrence of any recent Pteridophyte which shared with the higher plants the power of secondary growth in thickness provided by means of a meristematic zone. It is true that the presence or absence of a cambium does not in practice always coincide with the division into herbaceous and arborescent plants: no one would speak of a Date-Palm as a herbaceous plant despite the absence of secondary wood.
The danger which should be borne in mind, in adopting as a matter of convenience the term herbaceous as a sectional heading, is that it should not be taken to imply a complete inability of the so-called herbaceous types to make secondary additions to their conducting tissues. The specimens on which the species of Lycopodites and Selaginellites, (genera which may be designated herbaceous,) are founded are preserved as impressions and not as petrifications; we can, therefore, base definitions only on habit and on such features as are shown by fertile leaves and sporangia. We are fully justified in concluding from evidence adduced by Goldenberg more than fifty years ago and from similar evidence brought to light by more recent researches, that there existed in the Palaeozoic era lycopodiaceous species in close agreement in their herbaceous habit with the lycopods of present-day floras. It has been suggested[168] that the direct ancestors of the genera Lycopodium and Selaginella are represented by the species of Lycopodites and Selaginellites rather than by Lepidodendron and Sigillaria, the arborescent habit of which has been rendered familiar by the numerous attempts to furnish pictorial reproductions of a Palaeozoic forest. Until we are able to subject the species classed as herbaceous to microscopical examination we cannot make any positive statement as to the correctness of this view, but such facts as we possess lead us to regard the suggestion as resting on a sound basis.
Palaeobotanical literature abounds in records of species of Lycopodites, Lycopodium, Selaginella and Selaginites, which have been so named in the belief that their vegetative shoots bear a greater resemblance to those of recent lycopodiaceous plants than to the foliage shoots of Lepidodendron. Many of these records are valueless: Lepidodendra, twigs of Bothrodendron[169] species of conifers, fern rhizomes, and Aphlebiae[170] have masqueraded as herbaceous lycopods. It is obvious that an attempt to identify fossils presenting a general agreement in habit and leaf-form with recent species of lycopods must be attended with considerable risk of error. Recent Conifers include several species the smaller branches of which simulate the leafy shoots of certain species of Lycopodium and Selaginella, and it is not surprising to find that this similarity has been responsible for many false determinations. Among Mosses and the larger foliose Liverworts there are species which in the condition of imperfectly preserved impressions, might easily be mistaken for lycopodiaceous shoots: an equally close resemblance is apparent in the case of some flowering plants, such as New Zealand species of Veronica, Tafalla graveolens (a Composite), Lavoisiera lycopodiodes Gard.[171] (a species of Melastomaceae), all of which have the habit of Cupressineae among the conifers as well as of certain lycopodiaceous plants. It may be impossible to decide whether fossil impressions of branches, which are presumably lycopodiaceous, bear two kinds of leaves[172] like the great majority of recent species of Selaginella. Selaginella grandis, if seen from the under surface, would appear to have two rows of leaves only and might be confused with a small twig of such a conifer as Dacrydium Kirkii, a New Zealand species.
The New Zealand conifers Dacrydium cupressinum Soland. and Podocarpus dacrydioides Rich. closely simulate species of Selaginellites and Lycopodites: in the British Museum a specimen of the latter species bears a label describing it as Lycopodium arboreum (Sir Joseph Hooker and Dr Solander; 1769). The twigs of the Tasmanian conifer Microcachyrs tetragona Hook. f. are very similar in habit to shoots of the recent Lycopodium tetragonum ([fig. 121], C).
In the description of examples of Lycopodites and Selaginellites I have confined myself to such as appear to be above suspicion either because of the presence of spore-bearing organs or, in a few cases, because the specimens of sterile shoots are sufficiently large to show the form of branching in addition to the texture of the leaves. The two generic names Lycopodites and Selaginellites are employed for fossil species which there are substantial grounds for regarding as representatives of Lycopodium and Selaginella. The designation Selaginellites is adopted only for species which afford evidence of heterospory; the name Lycopodites, on the other hand, is used in a comprehensive sense to include all forms—whether homophyllous or heterophyllous—which are not known to be heterosporous. This restricted use of the generic name Selaginellites is advocated by Zeiller[173], who instituted the genus, and by Halle[174] in his recent paper on herbaceous lycopods.